M/S INTEVA PRODUCTS INDIA AUTOMOTIVE PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal remitted the issue to the AO for fresh consideration. It was held that if the amount was claimed as a deduction and TDS was not deducted, then Section 40(a)(ia) would be applicable, disallowing the deduction.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal involved a similar issue to a previous order passed by a co-ordinate bench. The issue pertained to the deductibility of an amount and the applicability of TDS provisions.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was whether the assessee was entitled to claim a deduction for an expenditure when TDS was not deducted, and the applicability of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH : BANGALORE
Before: SMT. BEENA PILLAI & SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU
Page 18 of 20 IT(TP)A No.272/Bang/2022 accordance with law. The assessee may be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard in this matter. The appeal is allowed in favour of the assessee for the statistical purposes."
Since the AR submitted that the facts are same in line with the above order passed by the co-ordinate bench in assessee's own case cited supra , therefore, considering the above judgment and arguments from both the parties, we also remit the issue to the file of the AO for fresh consideration in above terms and AU has to ensure, if the ass essee claimed this amount as deduction from the income of the assessee by way of charging to the P&L account or by way of deduction from the profits & gains from business or profession in the computation of total income for the AY 2017-18, the assessee shall deduct TDS on it, otherwise provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act are clearly applicable and the assessee is not entitled to claim this amount as deduction even on actual payment of this expenditure in this assessment year under consideration. Accordingly, this ground is allowed for statistical purpose.
More judgments on Section 40(a)(ia)
- Rekha Agarwal, Jaipur vs ITO WD 4(1), JaipurITA 844/JPR/2025[2021-22]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Cdg Petchem Limited, Hyderabad vs ITO, Ward - 1(1), HyderabadITA 1900/HYD/2025[2018-2019]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-2019
- M/S. Shree Laminators Ltd., Kolkata vs DCIT, Circle 4(4), KolkataITA 1534/KOL/2026[2011-2012]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2011-2012
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1493/KOL/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1492/KOL/2026[2013-2014]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2013-2014
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Sita Enterprises vs. Office Of The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Capri Global Capital LTD Through Represented By Its Law Officer Mr. Varun Kaljoria vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Principal SecretaryMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Sri Tatiparthy Venkata Swamy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 25 Oct 2026
- Piyush Shantilal Veera vs. State Of U.P.Allahabad · 23 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Pooja Shri Traders vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - 1Madras · 23 Oct 2026